Let's say we build a regiment of 50 of them. Going on Ross's ratios (sounds pretty official, eh?), that's 5 guys with two-handed swords and halberds; 10 with arquebuses and 35 with pikes. Seems a bit - to borrow a word - fecky to me.
What about 60 figures? 6 with two-handers and halberds, a dozen arquebusiers and 42 pikes. That seems a bit better, especially the arquebusiers. But it could be better for our close-quarter specialists.
Moving into danger territory, now. 80 figures. 8 guys with two-handed swords and halberds, 16 arquebusiers and 56 pikemen.
It might look a little like this:
PPPPPPPP
PPPPPPPP
PPPPPPPP
HSHSHSHS
PPCCCCPP
PPCCCCPP
PPPPPPPP
PPPPPPPP
AAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA
P=pike, H=halberd, S= two-handed sword, C="command" and A=arquebus.
Even more dangerously, I'm starting to look at figure poses. Common sense would dictate having the pikes more or less in the vertical position. But then I saw this:
 |
| Pinched fron the Tradition of London catalogue. |
Meanwhile, I've a thought bubble that I'll inflict upon you all. If wargamers strive for realism in their games, do fantasy gamers strive towards (whilst admitting that it's a chimera, a will o' the wisp, even) magical realism?
I'll stop bothering you now.
4 comments:
Not my period, BUT a large unit of these fellows would be something to behold, old horse.
Best Regards,
Von Tschatschke
My thoughts exactly, old katzbalger. Especially if one uses Willies and 4" steel wire pikes..!
Greg
Source Authenticity would be the equivalent ie being true to the inspiration where such exists as in LOTR or Hyboria.
Not to throw a wrench in, but, without being anywise an expert, I seem to recall that Landsknechts favoured a square formation but since, depending on whether in loose or close order, a man took up more depth than width this required more files than ranks to get that effect.
So rather than 8 x 8 more like 10 x 8, oops I just added 16 figures....
Bother.
Greg
Post a Comment